At 11:53 AM 6/2/99 -0500, Dr. Nuncheon wrote:
>On Wed, 2 Jun 1999, Joe Mucchiello wrote:
>
>> > A working rule we suggest is to make each Talent unique in the
>> > campaign; that is, once one player-character has a particular Talent,
>> > no other player-character can buy it (this is an optional rule, of
>> > course, and shouldn't apply to all campaigns).
>>
>> Ick. I don't even like the idea that you suggest this in the book.
>> Some player will complain: "I'm double-jointed, how can that villain be
>> double-jointed."
>
>"Because he's not a *player* character."
>"Because it's an optional rule."
>
>I think the idea behind the 'no duplicating Talents' is to give a little
>bit of uniqueness to each character and prevent everyone and their dog
>from loading up on the really useful talents. When one character has
>(say) Danger Sense, it's a part of that character's schtick - it helps
>make them unique. When two characters have it, it's an 'um...OK'
>situation. When three or more have it it starts to get ridiculous.
>

Or it becomes a unifying group theme.

Anyway, this sort of problem can occur just as easily with Powers, and even
with Skills. I had a character once whom I figured would be the Disguise
artist infiltrator of the group; it was a little awkward when I found out
two other PC's had equally good Disguise skills.

It's a good general principle for a GM to be aware of each PC's schtick.
However, I think this works better as a gamemastering principle than as a
game system rule (even an optional one.)

At 11:46 AM 6/2/1999 -0500, Dr. Nuncheon wrote:
>On Wed, 2 Jun 1999, Bob Greenwade wrote:
>
>> >> Duplication and Multiform revised to make them
>> >> easier to use (and, hopefully, more "player friendly" without being
>> >> unbalancing).
>> >
>> >How? There have been as many proposed ways to do this as there are
>> >posters to the list. And these powers change with each edition. How?
>>
>> My understanding is that they're going back to something closer to the
>> old 3rd Edition model.
>
>For the benefit of those of us who discovered HERO late...what were they
>like in 3rd Edition?

Appearance:
A shoggoth is described as a: "...nightmare, plastic column of fetid,
black iridescence... A shapeless congerie of protoplasmic bubbles...".
Shoggoths are fairly large, forming a 15' diameter sphere if floating in
water. On the ground, it will flatten out, covering a fairly large area.

Ecology:
Shoggoths were created millions of years ago by the Elder Things to act as
servants and beasts of labor. They still exist on Earth, usually at the
bottom of deep ocean trenches or in the ruined city of the Elder Things in
Antarctica. Shoggoths are virtually indestructible and can live almost
anywhere; fortunately, these creatures are very rare.

Motivations:
In general, shoggoths follow the aims and desires of their masters. A
free-roaming shoggoth, however, will have its own desires. Usually, it
wishes to be left alone, and will brutally destroy anything that it feels
is disturbing its existence.

Combat Techniques:
In combat, a shoggoth will lash out with a pseudopod trying to crush its
target. If it can grab a target, the hapless victim will be drawn into
the shoggoth's bulk, to be sucked apart and crushed. As a shoggoth is
virtually invulnerable to almost any conventional attack, they tend not to
retreat from combat.

Other Names: None

Rumors:
It is said that there are no more shoggoths left on the Earth.

Designer's Notes:
The shoggoth given here is derived from 5th Edition "Call of Cthulhu". It
should be considered a base-line template only, and Game Masters should
feel free to alter it at will in order to best achieve the image they have
of the Lovecraftian nightmare. Suggestions include: giving it "Cannot be
Stunned", Stretching, an HKA bite, some sort of HKA rupturing attack
("Must follow grab") and so on.

John Desmarais writes:
> On Tue, 1 Jun 1999 15:02:03 -0700 (PDT), Joe Mucchiello wrote:
> >No, not the random powers rules. I think the most serious attempt was
> >tried about a year ago. I've been on and off this list for nearly a
> >decade. The one about a year ago generated messages for at least a
> >month and still nothing came of it. I'll go look it up if you really
> >want to know about it.
>
> I wouldn't say nothing. I did end up with a system of
> "bolt-together" templates for quickly building super-heroes that I'm
> pretty happy with.

- --- "Steven J. Owens" <puff@netcom.com> wrote:
> John Desmarais writes:
> > On Tue, 1 Jun 1999 15:02:03 -0700 (PDT), Joe Mucchiello wrote:
> > >No, not the random powers rules. I think the most serious attempt was
> > >tried about a year ago. I've been on and off this list for nearly a
> > >decade. The one about a year ago generated messages for at least a
> > >month and still nothing came of it. I'll go look it up if you really
> > >want to know about it.
> >
> > I wouldn't say nothing. I did end up with a system of
> > "bolt-together" templates for quickly building super-heroes that I'm
> > pretty happy with.
>
> Care to post them?

I guess should incorporate the rest of the playtest notes into what I have
on-line, but from the quick glance I just took it looks pretty close to my
final version (I made a few decisions in the name of "point balance" that
proved to be less than ideal and there's a set of non-combat skill packages
that I need to add).

> Disadvantages: A new Social Limitation, into which Secret ID
> and Public ID are folded.
One social-type disad I'd like to bring up is the No Legal ID disad,
(this is more of a problem for heroes than for villains.) Not being able =
to
prove citizenship and other things *is* a problem you know.

> Bill Svitavsky wrote:
>
> I see your point, and I like the principle, too. There have been times,
> though, when I've had to sacrifice that principle to get a power to work
> exactly the way I want it to. More important to me is the principle that
> the System should let you build any power, exactly the way you want it to
> work. You might have to spend a lot of points to do so, which is only fair
> for a power which gives you a significant advantage, but you can do it
> given a game with a sufficiently high point level.
>
> Suppose I want a character who can travel FTL through the atmosphere. Why
> shouldn't I be able to construct that character? [snip]
>
> Suppose I want to build a character who can see through anything. N-Ray
> vision requires that something block it. [snip]

I'll add to this list:

Suppose I want a character who can missile /reflect/ at range?
Suppose I want a character that is truly unaffectable while Desolid?
Suppose I want a character who superleaps without a chance of missing?
Suppose I want a character who can teleport without risking death by
missing?

I know that some of these (Superleap, for example) have had custom
advantages
applied to them, but rather I think it would be cleaner to have 'Recommended
Limitations', that a GM should generally require on such powers, but can
forgo
when desired. The base cost of such powers could be increased appropriately
for the added utility. Yes, I know that this can result in problems with
frameworks and the active cost, but you'd get that anyway if you used an
advantage.

Actually, this debate is reminding me of some discussions on Damage
Reduction,
and how a character who wants to be (mostly) immune to Magic has to buy
physical, energy, and mental DR, each with a limitation. A simpler
construct
would be to have DR bought once vs. a single special effect, with no
limitation.

The core issue seems to be that sometimes you want to take a power, with
certain
advantages and limitations, and just package it into a new power, with it's
own
base cost, and eliminate the active point overhead. Sometimes this causes
problems (4th Ed. Hand Attack). Other times, it seems to work fairly safely
(Damage Reduction, as above). I'll throw out the hypothesis that its
generally
unsafe to do with powers that have a DC rating, but is safer when used with
other powers. Agreement? Disagreement? I've heard some mention of
meta-powers;
are they related to this issue?

At 03:12 PM 6/2/1999 -0400, Michael Surbrook wrote:
>SHOGGOTH
[snip]
> Physical Limitation:
>10 Cannot leap
>15 No fine manipulation
[snip]
>Rumors:
>It is said that there are no more shoggoths left on the Earth.
[snip]
>Designer's Notes:
>The shoggoth given here is derived from 5th Edition "Call of Cthulhu". It
>should be considered a base-line template only, and Game Masters should
>feel free to alter it at will in order to best achieve the image they have
>of the Lovecraftian nightmare. Suggestions include: giving it "Cannot be
>Stunned", Stretching, an HKA bite, some sort of HKA rupturing attack
>("Must follow grab") and so on.

I think debating a lot of this may be rather academic (a fancy word
meaning "pointless" :) ) until everyone's seen and read the entire relevant
text, and I certainly do *not* intend to try to explain all the various
changes and whatnot in advance. But just this once I'll delve into what's
going on and try to explain the thought processes involved behind the change
in question -- folding Instant Change into Transform. I'll save other
explanations for after the book is released and we're all working from the
same full text.
First off, before I delve into answering Curt's questions, a fact to
be aware of: IC was *never* supposed to work on anything but clothes. Prior
editions didn't explain it well, didn't conceptualize things correctly, or
what have you. This is just one of several 5th Ed. changes which reflect the
way the game's creators always intended things to work, but which didn't make
it into the rulebook, or did so in a fashion which led to confusion. This
led to the creation of, among other things, the invalid "IC Usable Against
Others" power construct which Bill S. and some others of you mentioned.

This is an example of *activation of a Power* (or group of Powers),
whether you define it as a Multiform, OIHID, or what have you. As such it's
already a Zero Phase Action, you don't need IC to make it a Zero-Phase
Action. This concept, along with better definitions of OIHID and how it
limits you, is discussed in greater detail in the 5th Ed.

<< >Instant Change = Wally West puts on his Flash costume and>>

All he's doing is Transforming something here -- "air" to "costume"
- -- hence it's a perfect example of why IC became simply a use of Transform.
Frankly, if the costume change accompanies the activation of Powers, I
wouldn't even necessarily make him pay for it; it's just a gimmick with no
real game effect.

<< >Instant Change = Merlin the Magician, who has been ambushed while in the
>bath by his arch-enemy mutters a quick incantation so that he's not fighting
>in the all-together ? >>

Here's the perfect example of a need for a version of IC using
Transform, I think -- the wizard who can create/alter any clothes to suit his
needs. But again, all he's doing is changing/creating something, and that
uses Transform. IC becomes one of several sidebar examples of Transform
(virtually every Power and Power Modifier has several examples in the sidebar
next to the main text, providing hundreds of ready-made abilities, gadgets,
etc. for you to drop right into your game, or use as examples for building
your own).
Some of you may ask, "But wait! How do you know how many BODY clothes
have?" The IC Transform uses the 5th Ed.'s Standard Effect Rule (where you
specify a roughly average outcome for every use of the Power to gain
predictability). That does enough effect to Transform any suit of clothes
(let's face it, how many BODY could clothes have, anyway?). To those who
want to fuss about the differences between armored clothing and other such
weirdness, I say, "C'mon, let's use a little common sense; this is a minor
little power effect; just define it and move on without working about every
freakin' possible exception or alteration of circumstance." :)
I hope that clears things up and saves some needless wrangling. ;)
If not, please carry on.

> So, briefly, here's some of what you'll see.
>
>
>Skills: Several new Skills, including Power, Teamwork, and Rapid Attack.
>General Skills eliminated; all appropriate Skills now based on
>Characteristics. A number of Skills broken down into subcategories (like TF
>and WF).

Cool. I've always been bothered by the General skills.

>Talents: Talents see some significant changes, in that we wanted to make
>clear that they are, in a sense, non-powered Powers -- "Powers" which even
>normal people sometimes have. Put another way, they're a sort of a halfway
>step between Skills and Powers. As such, you should be able to build Talents
>either with Powers or Skills or some combination of the two. Former Talents
>which couldn't be constructed with Powers or Skills (such as Defense
>Maneuver, Fast Draw, Find Weakness, Luck) become Skills or Powers.

Seems easy enough; Fast Draw was always fairly skill-like, and Luck was
always a power in all but name.

>
>Powers: Aid now costs 10 points per die. HA is 5 Active Points per die with
>a mandatory Limitation (it's what it always was -- a Limited type of STR,
>really -- broken out into its own category for ease of conception and play).

Pretty much what I've been doing with them for some time.

>Sense-Affecting Powers like Flash/Darkness now have differing costs for
>Targeting and Nontargeting Senses, and affect entire Sense Groups at their
>base level. Flash costs 5 points per d6, but works for a number of Segments,

Good. The single sense thing was always middlin' annoying...and often
irrational.

I tried the segments thing and often found it made the power perhaps a tiny
bit too good; I'll be interested in hearing other people's oppinions.

>not Phases. One new Power, Healing. Regeneration folded into Healing;

Hmmm. Wonder how it differs from Regen.

>Instant Change folded into Transform. Substantial expansion of Transform to

Heard about this before. Thought it was logical but a little silly.

>answer many (I'd say "all," but I'm not going to kid myself) of the questions
>surrounding that Power. A general expansion of most of the Powers to do the
>same thing and provide a lot more options (either as base rules, or as
>Adders/Advantages). Duplication and Multiform revised to make them easier to
>use (and, hopefully, more "player friendly" without being unbalancing).
>Expansion of Change Environment to allow minor combat effects.

All sounds good.

>
>Power Modifiers: More discussion of and options for Advantages and
>Limitations. A new Advantage, MegaScale, to allow Movement Powers and other
>abilities to work over vast ranges. Boostable Charges and Fuel Charges
>options for Charges. The "Great Linked Debate" put to rest (but no doubt
>leading to round 2 :) ).

Well, at least it'll be a _different_ one...

>
>Power Frameworks: Extended discussion of the restrictions on ECs.
>Discussion of how Advantages apply to slots and reserves, what it means to
>lose a slot (e.g., have a gadget broken), and so on.

Cool.

>
>Disadvantages: Expansion of several, including Dependence, Distinctive
>Features, and Rivalry. A new Social Limitation, into which Secret ID and
>Public ID are folded.

At 09:19 PM 6/2/1999 GMT, Acid Rainbow wrote:
>And also sprach Steven Long:
>
>> Disadvantages: A new Social Limitation, into which Secret ID
>> and Public ID are folded.
> One social-type disad I'd like to bring up is the No Legal ID disad,
>(this is more of a problem for heroes than for villains.) Not being able to
>prove citizenship and other things *is* a problem you know.

<< > Disadvantages: A new Social Limitation, into which Secret ID
> and Public ID are folded.
One social-type disad I'd like to bring up is the No Legal ID disad,
(this is more of a problem for heroes than for villains.) Not being able to
prove citizenship and other things *is* a problem you know. >>

You can do that with Social Limitation. You can represent being a
slave, having no civil rights, and many other things. My favorite is
attainder/corruption of the blood, in which the sins of the father are
visited on his descendants in terms of punishments or social restrictions
suffered. ;)

>>>No mention of "Advantaged" or "Enhanced" here. Bummer.
>>>
>>
>>Yeah, I'd like to see this given some sort of official recognition. Yes,
>>this is an easy one to abuse, but perhaps that's why it merits some
>>attention. I Occasionally, it's the only way of building something right.
>
>Gotta disagree...I like the philosophy of building the potential maximum,
>then limiting to achieve the desired effect. When a custom advantage is
>required, time for a house rule or change to the system. :)

I don't think that's really reasonable; specialized Advantages are bound to
come up from time to time. Expecting the system to cover all possibilities
off odd mechanical constructs needed for occasional use isn't particularly
practical. I also think the system passively accepts the idea even if it's
not spelled out.

>With the current setup, what you can do is sharply defined; you can take
>away from it in a customized fashion, but you can't add. If you could add
>whatever rules you wanted as a Custom Advantage, then there are no longer
>any boundaries.

And within the limit of what the GM finds acceptable, this is bad because...?

>I probably should have been more explicit. Assuming your character
>concept is 'Only in Hero ID', I always thought the Instant
>Change power was needed if you wanted to change between your normal
>and heroic forms without taking at least a phase.
>
>Has anybody else interpreted it that way ?

Yes. After all, I'd require a normal character to take at least that long
to change out of his civvies, why give it to the OHID person for free?

>Personally, I never like the idea that OIHID was a limitation. There should
>be no reason to give a bonus to Captain Marvel but a penalty to the Hulk.
>As far as I'm concerned it shouldn't be a limitation or advantage, just a
>special effect of playing. Sometimes you're in your secret id, sometimes
>you're not. Sometimes you have your costume, sometimes you don't.

If the Hulk had to pay for all of Bruce Banner's skills, I'd agree with you.
But as it is, the Hulk player can build the Hulk as a combat monster, and
then pay a relatively small fee to have a dedicated scientist in Banner.

>>>With the current setup, what you can do is sharply defined; you can take
>>>away from it in a customized fashion, but you can't add. If you could add
>>>whatever rules you wanted as a Custom Advantage, then there are no longer
>>>any boundaries.
>>
>>And that's bad because...?
>
>Because it means that the system is completely open ended...like if
>everyone was writing their own powers left and right. Makes it harder to
>transfer characters between games, etc.

I don't agree; it's a very selective alteration of an extent power in a way
defined in the advantage, and no worse in practice than some of the odder
use of extent powers I've seen. And frankly, I think the portability of
Champions characters is questionable at best, and for reasons that have
nothing to do with disagreements about Advantages.

Wayne Shaw writes:
> >I probably should have been more explicit. Assuming your character
> >concept is 'Only in Hero ID', I always thought the Instant
> >Change power was needed if you wanted to change between your normal
> >and heroic forms without taking at least a phase.
>
> Yes. After all, I'd require a normal character to take at least that long
> to change out of his civvies, why give it to the OHID person for free?

I'm not sure if it stuck around through the various editions, but
in the first edition rules it states that changing into hero ID takes
one phase. Part of the genre conventions. I vaguely remember reading
the general statement of the rule and I specifically remember the
sample scenario (I think it was Crimson Crusader and Starburst
vs. Grond and some thugs trying to rob a bank) giving an example of
the one-phase costume change.

>On Wed, 2 Jun 1999 14:35:28 -0700 (PDT), shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw) sent
>these symbols into the net:
>
>>
>>>Sense-Affecting Powers like Flash/Darkness now have differing costs for
>>>Targeting and Nontargeting Senses, and affect entire Sense Groups at their
>>>base level. Flash costs 5 points per d6, but works for a number of Segments,
>>
>>Good. The single sense thing was always middlin' annoying...and often
>>irrational.
>>
>>I tried the segments thing and often found it made the power perhaps a tiny
>>bit too good; I'll be interested in hearing other people's oppinions.
> I'd like to hear a bit more explanation on that, my experience was that
>the 4th edition rules made Agent-types pretty much immune to flash attacks
>because all the 50 point or better Agents had flash defense. My arguement
>in favor of flash attacks is that they *are* non-lethal, and generally
>don't do even do STUN damage.

Well, I was only using the dice per 10, but counting full pips, not Body.
Now that I reread this, I think they're still talking about counting Body.
At that point, at least some serious Flash Defense has to be purchased to
make you completely immune. Under the system I tried out it was a bit too
easy to disable someone for the whole fight with one attack.

>> From: "Steven J. Owens" <puff@netcom.com>
>
> Wayne Shaw writes:
I always thought the Instant
> > >Change power was needed if you wanted to change between your normal
> > >and heroic forms without taking at least a phase.
> >
> > Yes. After all, I'd require a normal character to take at least that long
> > to change out of his civvies, why give it to the OHID person for free?
>
> I'm not sure if it stuck around through the various editions, but
> in the first edition rules it states that changing into hero ID takes
> one phase. Part of the genre conventions. I vaguely remember reading
> the general statement of the rule and I specifically remember the
> sample scenario (I think it was Crimson Crusader and Starburst
> vs. Grond and some thugs trying to rob a bank) giving an example of
> the one-phase costume change.

Right. I've been playing Champions for that long. I was going to refer to
the rule explicitly mentioning the costume change but then remembered that
it was probably from an earlier edition so didn't bother.

Incidentally, I think that the one-phase costume change is way too short...

> From: SteveL1979@aol.com
>
> First off, before I delve into answering Curt's questions, a fact to
> be aware of: IC was *never* supposed to work on anything but clothes. Prior
> editions didn't explain it well, didn't conceptualize things correctly, or
> what have you.

>
> << >Isn't there a difference between
> >Instant Change = Billy Batson becomes Captain Marvel and >>
>
> This is an example of *activation of a Power* (or group of Powers),
> whether you define it as a Multiform, OIHID, or what have you. As such it's
> already a Zero Phase Action, you don't need IC to make it a Zero-Phase
> Action. This concept, along with better definitions of OIHID and how it
> limits you, is discussed in greater detail in the 5th Ed.
>
OK, good. A needed clarification.

I really never had a problem with the Wally West ==> Flash
or the Merlin ==> any clothes Instant Change as transformation, just
the first case. (Of course, Merlin should end up paying more.)
And it turns out that was a misinterpretation of the
intent for Instant Change.

Thanks for the response, Steve.

Curt Hicks

(Hmmm, if it takes more than a zero phase action to transform into my heroic
identity, can I then take an additional limitation for extra time to start
on all those powers...)

> << >Instant Change = Wally West puts on his Flash costume and>>
>
> All he's doing is Transforming something here -- "air" to "costume"
> -- hence it's a perfect example of why IC became simply a use of Transform.
> Frankly, if the costume change accompanies the activation of Powers, I
> wouldn't even necessarily make him pay for it; it's just a gimmick with no
> real game effect.
>
> << >Instant Change = Merlin the Magician, who has been ambushed while in the
> >bath by his arch-enemy mutters a quick incantation so that he's not fighting
> >in the all-together ? >>
>
> Here's the perfect example of a need for a version of IC using
> Transform, I think -- the wizard who can create/alter any clothes to suit his
> needs. But again, all he's doing is changing/creating something, and that
> uses Transform. IC becomes one of several sidebar examples of Transform
> (virtually every Power and Power Modifier has several examples in the sidebar
> next to the main text, providing hundreds of ready-made abilities, gadgets,
> etc. for you to drop right into your game, or use as examples for building
> your own).
> Some of you may ask, "But wait! How do you know how many BODY clothes
> have?" The IC Transform uses the 5th Ed.'s Standard Effect Rule (where you
> specify a roughly average outcome for every use of the Power to gain
> predictability). That does enough effect to Transform any suit of clothes
> (let's face it, how many BODY could clothes have, anyway?). To those who
> want to fuss about the differences between armored clothing and other such
> weirdness, I say, "C'mon, let's use a little common sense; this is a minor
> little power effect; just define it and move on without working about every
> freakin' possible exception or alteration of circumstance." :)
> I hope that clears things up and saves some needless wrangling. ;)
> If not, please carry on.
>
> Steve Long
>
>

> From: shaw@caprica.com (Wayne Shaw)
> Subject: Re: Instant Change
> Sender: owner-champ-l@sysabend.org
>
> >Incidentally, I think that the one-phase costume change is way too short...
>
> I think it's a genre convention. I've seen any number of heroes with no
> real excuse do it in clearly extremely short periods of time in the past.
>
Yep. Probably the same kind of thing as how heroes without super-movement
abilities are able to get to the crime scene / disaster area / trouble
in time to do anything.

I always tried to stay away from bank robbery scenarios, because I figured
any competent villain should be able to show up, get the cash and leave
before the heroes made it there. Now having the heroes ALREADY at
the scene is another matter.

> The discussion was based around 30/60/90 point power packages that
> could be mixed and matched to form characters with 10-15 points to
> spare for window dressing your characters. The idea broke down when
> you considered all of the limiting factors a GM should require of his
> characters: max DCs vs max Defense vs max CVs.

Hm, I'm not sure precisely what you're alluding to here. I
suspect you *still* have far too broad a concept in mind, compared to
what I'm considering. Think of something more along the lines of
constructing a list of spell powers for a fantasy hero game. I don't
play Fantasy Hero, but I get the impression that the normal approach
is for the GM to define the available spell powers, put a price on
them, and allow the players to purchase them.

Also, it should be needless to say this, but then again the
intended audience is beginners: the power packages would not be handed
out willy-nilly, without restriction. The booklet would have to
include guidelines for the players and for the GM, as well as some
examples of character creation. Just because the packages are
30/60/90 (though I'm not sure I like those breakpoints) doesn't mean
the GM should let the player buy two 90point attack packages and a 60
point defense package.

> My problem with the power packages was END usage. Giving a
> character a 12D6 EB without a corresponding boost in END/REC is
> going to create an annoying-to-play character. (I take another
> REC!)

This one is easy to address in several ways.

Frankly I have a hard time with a character buying a 12d6 EB to
begin with - how many GMs would let that into a campaign? If it's not
reasonable as a power built by an experienced player, why would you
put it in the book as a power purchasable by a beginning player?

Second, I was intending that the 90 point power packages are for
the main schtick for a character, and would include either a framework
or possibly just a complementary "set" of powers (complementary in the
geometric sense - appropriately grouped powers).

Third, the character is not just buying powers, but should
be buying a good assortment of power packages. One package for attack,
one for defense, one for attributes, one for movement. The general idea
is to have a more coarsely-grained version of normal Hero character
building. You don't build a brick and then simply buy lots of strength.
You know the brick needs CON for END and for durability. This approach
simply group some of that together.

The player starts by taking the "standard heroic physique"
package to provide a decent minimum in most of the stats, then gets
the "really strong" package, which provides a lot more STR and some
CON and a little BOD, then gets the "really tough" package which means
even more CON and more BOD and some extra PD and ED and maybe even a
little armor, then the "armor" package for the serious defenses, a few
minor packages for movement (bricks aren't known for being fleet) and
some flavor, a few skills, and you're done.

The power package guide could and should include recommendations;
all of the energy projector type powers should include a note that if
the player is buying a lot of these types of powers, he or she should
think about buying the END Reserve package (although it should be more
obviously named - named to reflect the effect and not the game
mechanic it's built on; maybe "energy source") or get an appropriate
physique-enhancing package.

Fourth, these are not _powers_ but power _packages_, and they're
intended to _simplify_ the game. Heck, I think third edition even
suggested just dropping END cost issues to simplify the game. In this
case, since this is intended to be compatible with standard Hero
games, build the package to be zero END, either by taking reduced END
on the powers or by including an appropriate amount of extra END/REC
into the power.

(I wonder if this is a good time to bring up my old Constant END
power idea? This was based on the numbers for END Reserves. It's
more or less an idea to replace the Reduced End Cost advantage with a
fine-grained constantly-renewing END Reserve. The ultimate idea is
that instead of buying Reduced End Cost, you could pay something like
1*SPD per point of END Cost for a power, to buy off the END cost of a
power. It's effectively setting up an END Reserve specifically for
that power, with enough REC to use the power every phase and fully
recover every turn; the math is simplified and there are some minor
advantages and limitations that balance out).

> The problem is balance. Lists of powers are not balanced without
> expanding the number of lists into too much complexity.

Once again, back to the basic concept; it's not a list of powers,
it's a set of compatible power _packages_ designed to fit a narrow
scope that makes for an easy, playable campaign.

> > In other words, having a set of characters for a single adventure is
> > too narrow. Having in essence a shrink-wrapped campaign may seem
> > useless to somebody steeped in the Hero system, but to a beginner it
> > makes a ton of sense.
>
> Yes, this part I agree with. Making a chinese menu for character
> generation as a part of a single adventure is probably possible. But,
> what happens when you make the second introductory adventure which
> assumes a different power level and someone tries to mix and match the
> power lists?

The answer is that you don't make a second introductory adventure
which assumes a different power level; you make a second introductory
adventure (and a third, and a fourth, and a fifth, and a sixth) which
assumes the same power levels (perhaps with some slight tweaking to
allow for character development if the adventures are meant to be
sequentially played). You define precise and full power levels - or
more to the point, power level guidelines - for the first introductory
adventure and you follow it for the rest of the introductory
adventures.

If you make more than one campaign set, with different power
levels and even different milieus, then you make them very clearly of
different styles/genres. Mixing and matching falls under the heading
of "know what you're doing before you do this", and since the power
packages are all real powers designed with the standard rules,
experienced Hero gamers can play with the system and inexperienced
Hero games can learn about the system.

> >...A booklet full of power packages;
>
> This is exactly what the discussion I was talking about wanted to make:
> a 250 page list of all powers book. I don't remember who thought that
> was a good idea but I assume he is locked in a padded room by now if he
> tried to write it. :-)

Once again, back to the basic concept; not a list of all powers,
a booklet of power packages. Two very different things. The only thing
I see in common is that they both attempt to solve the same problem,
although this approach you're talking about takes an inclusive approach,
trying to generate every combination, and I'm talking about taking an
exclusive approach - excluding the complicating factors and narrowing
the scope of the problem down to a workable set.

> > villains grouped by power levels, along with advice for the novice GM
> > on how to run the villains as stand-alone characters, members of a
> > villian group, or flunkies for master villains. A set of scenarios
> > gradually increasing in scope and power level, with recommedations
> > for which villains to use with them.
>
> This part of the idea is a good idea in general, with or without the
> menu characters.

Sure, but since the end goal here is to get people into the game,
each of these pieces is a necessary-but-not-sufficient part of the
answer.

> > In essence, a campaign in a box. Boring? Not enough of a
> > challenge to seasoned Hero gamers? Perhaps. But then again, we're
> > not exactly overflowing with seasoned *or* new players. There has to
> > be *some* lingua franca, a pidgin that's accessible to new players
> > and acceptable to seasoned players.
>
> There are not a lot of newbies in the HERO system. Probably because it
> lacks an easy entry point.

That was pretty much the point of the above paragraph (not to mention
the entire thread - did you catch the beginning of it?)

> However, how does this lingua franca really
> become pidgin HERO if none of the seasoned players speak it?

It does if each package comes with a fully written out definition
in standard Hero game rules. Seasoned players and new players can
easily play in the same game, although it'd run even more smoothly if
the seasoned players voluntarily (or presumably at GM request) refrain
from using a few complicating rules (like having odd SPD numbers).

And of course the seasoned players are going to be able to
engineer their characters to get maximum bang for the buck - the GM
should rein this tendency in a bit for introductory games. Or maybe
give the inexperienced players a point bonus, since they're limited in
the range of point-engineering techniques they can use.

> > I'd like to see those archives; I suspect the topic was never
> > well-explored, and frankly I can see why.
>
> No, it was discussed for over a month.

Which has little to do with whether it was well-explored or not.

> I gave it a stab for a few days and then when the discussion took a
> turn that I thought could not work (or would lead to madness), I
> dropped out of it. If I'm bored tonight or tomorrow, I'll see how big
> it is and let you know.

I'd be interested in seeing it.

> > Maybe Hero needs to look at trying an "open source" style
> > net-based collaboration? Maybe appoint a handful of people they know
> > and trust to run editoral control
>>
> This was also discussed in the other discussion. Person A could do
> movement power and Person B could do whatever.

Collaboration involves more than different people taking on
different pieces of the problem. It involves the collaborators
working together, communicating, coordinating and possibly even some
neutral party serving to foster all of the above (like an editor on a
publication).

> Steven, if I don't get back to you privately or on the list about this
> in a few days and you find that you are still interested, send me a
> reminder email.